Tuesday, January 29, 2008

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEBORDERAMBASSADORS.com TO "DEPUTIZE" WINTER TEXANSMcAllen, TX January 28, 2008 All Winter Texans in the Valley are invited to a `party party' at Pepe's Bar and Grill on the Rio Grande from two until five p.m. this Saturday, February 2, 2008. Jeff Reed of Pepe's and BorderAmbassadors.com are hosting the event to `deputize' attendees as BorderAmbassadors to return home and urge their friends, neighbors and relatives to stand with them and Valley residents against `the wall.' According to Reed, musical entertainment will begin as early at 1 p.m. The `party party' will include numerous door prize drawings and area politicos and citizens will answer attendees' questions about the lack of need for a Wall to separate Texas from Mexico. BorderAmbassadors.com was founded by Jay Johnson-Castro of Del Rio to campaign against construction of the wall as well as to promote tourism and economic growth on the Border. Its membership stretches from Brownsville to El Paso and on to the California coast. "By deputizing the Winter Texans, who love the ambiance of the Rio Grande Valley, we will have ambassadors all over the U.S. dispelling the un-truths that are being told by many of the talk show hosts and TV commentators," stated Johnson-Castro. We support the actions of our elected officials and landowners who refuse to bow to the heavy-handed tactics of the DHS," he continued. "However, this `party party' is primarily about the camaraderie that Texans enjoy with our great winter visitors."For more information, call Sarah Boone at 830-768-1100 before 1/31/08.On or after 1/31/08, call Jay Johnson-Castro at 830-768-0768 or cell, 830-734-8636.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Ignoring the growing opposition to the construction of walls along the border, DHS Secretary Chertoff is pushing for hundreds of miles to be built in 2008. This despite the fact that Chertoff himself said back in July,

"Fencing is not the cure-all for the problem at the border. I think the fence has come to assume a certain kind of symbolic significance which should not obscure the fact that it is a much more complicated problem than putting up a fence which someone can climb over with a ladder or tunnel under with a shovel.”

Instead of searching for substantive solutions to border issues, Chertoff is plowing ahead with the hollow symbol of the wall. To quickly lay the groundwork the Department of Homeland Security has once again hired a private contractor, e2M, to sell the wall. In the past month they have issued a steady stream of reports that are intended to give the impression that the environmental and societal impacts of the wall have been thoroughly evaluated, and that the National Environmental Policy Act is being complied with. One of the requirements of NEPA is public input and openness, so brief public comment periods have been established for each sector's report. It is vital that they hear from us, as our comments will become part of the official public record. DHS has recently taken to lying to Congress and the press about the inclusion of public input into the border wall process. A flood of comments opposing the wall will make it more difficult for them to lie about public support for the border wall.

Below is the information needed to access and comment upon each of the newly released reports.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

We invite all those in Big Bend who believe the river should unite us with Mexico and its citizens rather than dividing us to join in a press confernce and peaceful demonstration against the Border Wall on January 23, 2008, at 3:30 p.m. on the public sidewalk adjacent to the Paisano Hotel in Marfa, Texas.

Following the BIG BEND NO BORDER WALL COALITION press conference, Homeland Security will have an Open House in the Paisano Hotel which is hosted by their contracting environmental out-sourcing company.

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

The Department of Homeland Security has announced that 4 miles of new border wall (or border fence, or tactical infrastructure) will be built near Del Rio, Texas beginning in the Spring of 2008. A Draft Environmental Assessment has been released, and public comments will be accepted through February 5th, 2008.

You can submit a public comment on the Del Rio, Texas border wall in one of the following ways:

a) Attend and submit comments at the public open house to be held 4:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. local time on January 24, 2008 at the at the Ramada Inn-Del Rio, 2101 Veterans Boulevard, Del Rio, Texas 78840.b) Electronically through the Web site at: http://www.borderfencenepa.com/c) By email to: DRcomments@BorderFenceNEPA.comd) By mail to: Del Rio Sector Tactical Infrastructure EA, c/o e²M, 2751 Prosperity Avenue, Suite 200, Fairfax, Virginia 22031e) By Fax to: (757) 299-4101

When submitting comments, please include name and address, and identify comments as intended for the Del Rio Sector Draft EA.

All submitted comments are supposed to become a part of the public record. To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act the Final Environmental Assessment should include responses to the public comments that are received.

In fiscal 2007 the Del Rio Sector, where there has never been a wall, saw a 45% drop in apprehensions of border crossers. In contrast, the San Diego sector, where there has been a wall for over a decade, saw a 7% increase. DHS has yet to explain the rationale for importing this failed and expensive project from San Diego to Del Rio, where they seem to be having great success without it.

It is especially important that the public comment on the Del Rio Draft EA because it is a fundamentally flawed document that in no way meets the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. The most glaring deficiency is its description of the purpose for carrying out the proposed action. Rather than establishing national security or the reduction of illegal activity as the purpose, the Draft EA states,

“The purpose of the Proposed Action is to increase border security within USBP Del Rio Sector through the construction, operation, and maintenance of tactical infrastructure in the form of fences, roads, and supporting technological and tactical assets.” (1.2 - 4)

If the purpose and the proposed action are one and the same - the construction, operation, and maintenance of “tactical infrastructure” - then by definition no other alternatives will be able to achieve the stated purpose. “Additional USBP Agents in Lieu of Tactical Infrastructure” may in fact be highly effective at preventing unauthorized entries into the United States, but because it is “in Lieu of Tactical Infrastructure” it will never bring about the stated goal of “the construction, operation, and maintenance of tactical infrastructure.” The same holds true for all of the other “Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Detailed Analysis.” In each case, the phrase “in Lieu of Tactical Infrastructure” is attached, so by definition none will align with the stated purpose. This is a clear violation of the Council on Environmental Quality’s regulations.

The private contractor hired by the Department of Homeland Security is apparently more interested in pleasing their employer than complying with NEPA. Instead of producing misleading document with a predetermined outcome, they should go back to the drawing board and produce an unbiased assessment of the environmental and cultural impacts that the border wall will have. A project of this magnitude requires a full Environmental Impact Statement rather than a far less rigorous Environmental Assessment. In either case, the final document should provide objective information rather than a sales pitch.

It is crucial that everyone with these and other concerns about the border wall submit them in writing. The Department of Homeland Security will interpret silence as a lack of interest.

Friday, January 4, 2008

The Department of Homeland Security has announced that 44.6 miles of new border wall (or border fence, or tactical infrastructure) will be built near Calexico, California beginning in the Spring of 2008. A Draft Environmental Assessment has been released, and public comments will be accepted through January 24th, 2008.

You can submit a public comment on the California border wall in one of the following ways:

(a) Attendance and submission of comments at the Pubic Open House to be held on January 9 2008 at the Imperial Valley Expo, 200 East Second Street, in Imperial, California.(b) Electronically through the web site at: http://www.borderfencenepa.com/(c) By email to: ECcomments@BorderFenceNEPA.com(d) By mail to: El Centro Sector Tactical Infrastructure EA, c/o e²M, 2751 Prosperity Avenue, Suite 200, Fairfax, Virginia 22031(e) By fax to: (757) 299-5585

When submitting comments, please include name and address, and identify comments as intended for the El Centro Sector Draft EA.

All submitted comments are supposed to become a part of the public record. To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act the Final Environmental Assessment should include responses to the public comments that are received.

It is especially important that the public comment on the El Centro Draft EA because it is a fundamentally flawed document that in no way meets the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. The most glaring deficiency is its description of the purpose for carrying out the proposed action. Rather than establishing national security or the reduction of illegal activity as the purpose, the Draft EA states,

“The purpose of the Proposed Action is to increase border security within USBP El Centro Sector through the construction, operation, and maintenance of tactical infrastructure in the form of fences, roads, and supporting technological and tactical assets.” (ES-1)

The “proposed action” is described as follows:

“CBP proposes to construct, operate, and maintain tactical infrastructure consisting of four discrete sections of primary pedestrian fence, lighting, and roads; one section of lighting; and access roads along the U.S. / Mexico International Border in the USBP El Centro Sector, California.” (1.3 – 3)

If the purpose and the proposed action are one and the same - the construction, operation, and maintenance of “tactical infrastructure” - then by definition no other alternatives will be able to achieve the stated purpose. “Additional USBP Agents in Lieu of Tactical Infrastructure” (2.3.1 – 6) may in fact be highly effective at preventing unauthorized entries into the United States, but because it is “in Lieu of Tactical Infrastructure” it will never bring about the stated goal of “the construction, operation, and maintenance of tactical infrastructure.” The same holds true for all of the other “Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Detailed Analysis.” In each case, the phrase “in Lieu of Tactical Infrastructure” is attached, so by definition none will align with the stated purpose. This is a clear violation of the Council on Environmental Quality’s regulations.

The private contractor hired by the Department of Homeland Security is apparently more interested in pleasing their employer than complying with NEPA. Instead of producing misleading document with a predetermined outcome, they should go back to the drawing board and produce an unbiased assessment of the environmental and cultural impacts that the border wall will have. A project of this magnitude requires a full Environmental Impact Statement rather than a far less rigorous Environmental Assessment. In either case, the final document should provide objective information rather than a sales pitch.

It is crucial that everyone with these and other concerns about the border wall submit them in writing. The Department of Homeland Security will interpret silence as a lack of interest.

NO BORDER WALL Take Action!

The Secure Fence Act requires over 700 miles of “at least 2 layers of reinforced fencing” along the US-Mexico border. The Real ID Act allows the Homeland Security Secretary to waive ALL laws in order to build this wall.

The border wall will not make the United States safer or solve our immigration issues, but it will cause great damage to our borderlands and to our standing as a free, democratic nation.

Help us repeal this terrible legislation by swaying Congress and changing national attitudes. If we do not raise our voices a new Berlin Wall will scar our southern border.

La Lomita No Border Wall Festival in Mission, Texas

Father Roy Snipes leads the procession from the historic La Lomita chapel to the Rio Grande.

No Border Wall at Progreso, Texas International Bridge

Who we are

is a grassroots coalition of groups and individuals united in our belief that a border wall will not stop illegal immigration or smuggling and will not make the United States any safer. It will do irreparable harm to our borderlands and our country as a whole. We urge our elected representatives to reject the border wall and repeal the Secure Fence Act and the Real ID Act.